ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 15.02.2020 passed by Opposite Party No.3 i.e. Settlement Officer Consolidation, Sitapur, by which the services of the petitioner has been terminated.

(2.) The impugned order dated 15.02.2020 states that by order dated 20.10.1989 passed by the Commissioner Consolidation, Lucknow, U.P., the services of the petitioner was terminated. Against the order dated 20.10.1989, the petitioner preferred a Writ Petition No.9578 of 1989. In the said writ petition an interim order had been granted by this Court. In pursuance of interim order the petitioner was continuing in service, the writ petition however was dismissed on 12.04.2010. But the petitioner has not informed the authorities. Two applications were also dismissed on 26.04.2019. Hence the continuance of petitioner in service was due to the fact that the authorities has no knowledge hence the continuance was not legal. In the said circumstances there was no justification for his continuance in service hence his services is terminated with immediate effect.

(3.) Heard the learned counsels for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner heard on telephone as he expressed his inability to connect on video conferencing. He mainly submitted that prior to the passing of the order dated 15.02.2020 neither any show cause notice has been issued nor any opportunity was provided to the petitioner. The order dated 15.02.2020 has been passed in complete violation of the principles of natural justice.